颈动脉内膜剥脱术和颈动脉支架的疗效分析

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的回顾分析颈动脉内膜剥脱（carotid endarterectomy，CEA）及颈动脉支架（carotid artery stenting， CAS）治疗颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄的近期和中期临床效果。方法比较北京协和医院血管外科2010年1月-2014年12月行CEA及CAS患者的临床资料，分析两种术式的安全性及1年内出现再狭窄及再发卒中的情况。结果研究期间共收治颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者572例，其中456例行CEA，116例行CAS。两组患者术前一般资料、临床症状、伴随疾病等因素均无显著性差异。CEA组和CAS组手术相关死亡（0.2% vs 0）、术后30 d内缺血性卒中（1.1% vs 1.7%）、急性心肌梗死（0.7％ vs 1.7%）、局部血肿（0.4% vs 0.8%）、植入物感染（0.4% vs 0）、颅外神经损伤（1.1% vs 0）、过度灌注发生率（5.7% vs 3.4%）均无显著差异。CAS组术后持续低血压发生率显著高于CEA组（12.9% vs 1.1%，P <0.01）。1年随访结果显示，CAS组出现治疗侧颈动脉再狭窄（>50%）显著高于CEA组（6.9% vs 2.6%，P =0.026），但两组术后重度狭窄（>70%）（2.5% vs 1.1%）及同侧卒中发生率（0.9% vs 0.4%）上没有显著性差异。结论 CEA和CAS都是治疗颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄安全有效的措施，但CAS组术后持续低血压及治疗侧颈动脉1年再狭窄发生率高于CEA组。

文章导读： 本研究通过大样本的动脉内膜剥脱术和支架置入术治疗颈动脉狭窄的回顾性分析比较优缺点，结果显示支架术后持续低血压及1年再狭窄（狭窄率＞50%）更高。

关键词: 颈动脉狭窄; 动脉内膜剥脱术; 支架

Abstract:

Objective To analyze the early and midterm outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in patients with arteriosclerotic carotid artery stenosis retrospectively. Methods The clinical data were collected and analyzed for the patients with arteriosclerotic carotid stenosis treated with CEA or CAS from January 2010 to December 2014 in Peking Union Medical College Hospital. The rate of periprocedural complication, the restenosis and ipsilateral stroke happened in the first year after the procedure were compared. Results From January 2010 to December 2014, 572 patients with carotid artery stenosis were treated in our institution. Among whom, 456 cases of CEA and 116 cases of CAS were performed. There was no significant difference of the characteristics in the two groups. There was no significant difference in surgery-related death (0.2% vs 0), 30 d ischemic stroke (1.1% vs 1.7%), acute myocardial infarction (0.7% vs 1.7%), wound hematoma (0.4% vs 0.8%), implant infection (0.4% vs 0), cranial nerve damage (1.1% vs 0) and hyperperfusion syndrome (5.7% vs 3.4%) between CEA and CAS, respectively. The ratio of persistent hypotension was significant higher in CAS group (12.9% vs 1.1%, P <0.01). One year follow-up showed that there was more restenosis (>50%) in CAS group (6.9% vs 2.6%, P =0.026), but there was no significant difference in severe restenosis (>70%) (2.5% vs 1.1%) and ipsilateral stroke (0.9% vs 0.4%) between the two groups. Conclusion Both CEA and CAS are safe and effective in the treatment of carotid artery stenosis. However, the ratio of persistent hypotension and restenosis is significant higher in CAS group.

Key words: Carotid stenosis; Endarterectomy; Stenting

陈宇，刘昌伟，刘志丽，吴巍巍，曾嵘，宋小军，刘暴. 颈动脉内膜剥脱术和颈动脉支架的疗效分析[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2016, 11(07): 536-541.

CHEN Yu, LIU Chang-Wei, LIU Zhi-Li, et al.. Efficacy Analysis of Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting[J]. Chinese Journal of Stroke, 2016, 11(07): 536-541.

参考文献

1 No r t h Ame r i c a n S ymp t oma t i c C a r o t i d

Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. Beneficial effect

of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients

with high-grade carotid stenosis[J]. N Engl J Med，

1991，325：445-453.

2 World Health Organization. Recommendations

on st roke prevention，diagnosis，and therapy.

Report of the WHO Task Force on Stroke and other

Cerebrovascular Disorders[J]. Stroke，1989，20：1407-

1431.

3 中华医学会心血管疾病分会. 急性心肌梗死诊断和治

疗指南[J]. 中华心血管病杂志，2001，29：705-720.

4 Ogasawara K，Sakai N，Kuroiwa T，et al. Intracranial

hemorrhage associated with cerebral hyperperfusion

syndrome following carotid endarterectomy and

carotid artery stenting：retrospective review of 4494

patients[J]. J Neurosurg，2007，107：1130-1136.

5 Susan MT，Rabih AC，Stephanie CL. Analysis of

parameters associated with hypotension requiring

vasopressor support after carotid angioplasty and

stenting[J]. J Vasc Surg，2005，12：714-715.

6 Mozaffarian D，Benjamin EJ，Go AS，et al. Heart

disease and stroke statistics--2015 update：a report

from the American Heart Association[J]. Circulation，

2015，131：e29-322.

7 Ederle J，Dobson J，Featherstone RL，et al. Carotid

ar tery stenting compared with endar terectomy

in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis

(International Carotid Stenting Study)：an interim

analysis of a randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet，

2010，375：985-997.

8 Timaran CH，Mantese VA，Malas M，et al. Differential

outcomes of carotid stenting and endarterectomy

performed exclusively by vascular surgeons in the

Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus

Stenting Trial (CREST)[J]. J Vasc Surg，2013，57：303-

308.

9 Lieb M，Shah U，Hines GL. Cerebral hyperperfusion

syndrome after carotid intervention：a review[J].

Cardiol Rev，2012，20：84-89.

10 Moulakakis KG，Mylonas SN，Sfyroeras GS，et

al. Hy per per f usion syndrome af ter ca rot id

revascularization[J]. J Vasc Surg，2009，49：1060-1068.

11 Mylonas SN，Moulakakis KG，Antonopoulos CN，et

al. Carotid artery stenting-induced hemodynamic

instability[J]. J Endovasc Ther，2013，20：48-60.

12 Borhani Haghighi A，Kokabi S，Yousefi S，et al. The

prevalence and factors contributing to hemodynamic

depression in patients undergoing carotid angioplasty

and stenting[J]. J VascInterv Neurol，2015，8：5-10.

13 Bonati LH，Ederle J，Mc Cabe DJ，et al. Longterm

risk of carotid restenosis in patients randomly

assigned to endovascular treatment or endarterectomy

in the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal

Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS)：long-term follow-up

of a randomised trial[J]. Lancet Neurol，2009，8：908-

917.

14 Lal BK，Beach KW，Roubin GS，et al. Restenosis

after carotid artery stenting and endarterectomy：

a secondary analysis of CREST，a randomized

controlled trial[J]. Lancet Neurol，2012，11：755-

763.

[1]	张亮, 贺雄军, 黎凯锋, 周宏星, 胡明, 刘亚杰. 对比剂过敏患者在无造影下行颈动脉支架置入术1例报道[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(10): 1108-1111.
[2]	中国卒中学会神经介入分会. 症状性颅内动脉粥样硬化性狭窄血管内治疗中国专家共识2022[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(08): 863-888.
[3]	杨洪超, 刘振强, 莫大鹏. 不同引流静脉类型对支架治疗特发性颅内高压合并静脉窦狭窄疗效的影响[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(07): 737-741.
[4]	仲伟斌, 王鹏飞, 于进超, 张金彪, 李振光. 支架治疗颈动脉夹层导致急性脑梗死2例报告及文献复习[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(06): 653-657.
[5]	凌一童, 孙玉杰, 李广文, 刘彤晖, 李野, 张勇. 雷帕霉素洗脱支架与金属裸支架治疗症状性颅内动脉粥样硬化性狭窄的效果比较[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(05): 529-534.
[6]	霍晓川, 李晓青, 缪中荣, 国家神经系统疾病医疗质量控制中心神经介入质控专家委员会, 急性脑梗死再灌注治疗质量改进国家行动血管内治疗工作委员会. 2020中国急性缺血性卒中血管内治疗现状调查分析[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(01): 56-65.
[7]	刘福德, 陈晨, 宋文锋, 袁兴运, 韩建峰, 王建懿. RECO支架与Solitaire支架对急性前循环大血管闭塞血管再通的疗效及安全性对比研究[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(12): 1229-1234.
[8]	孙勇, 杨波, 康开江, 高峰, 莫大鹏, 缪中荣, 马宁. 锁骨下动脉闭塞血管内再通治疗的可行性分析[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(09): 940-945.
[9]	付文华, 瞿千千, 吕海东. 乳头状心脏黏液瘤致脑栓塞超急性期桥接治疗1例报道[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(07): 730-733.
[10]	曹毅. 支架辅助栓塞在颅内动脉瘤治疗中的应用[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(06): 533-536.
[11]	陈柏宇, 曹毅, 鲍娟, 杨勇涛, 景睿, 李云飞, 胡佳怡, 赵青. 支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞治疗前交通动脉宽颈动脉瘤[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(06): 544-550.
[12]	徐伟东, 陈如东, 厉华, 曾令成, 杨洪宽, 于加省. 替罗非班治疗颅内动脉瘤介入围手术期支架内血栓的单中心经验[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(06): 556-560.
[13]	简能日, 周轩, 罗一纯, 高荣慧, 胡航佳, 胡发云. 直接抽吸取栓术与机械支架取栓术在急性颅内血管闭塞中的疗效对比[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(06): 585-589.
[14]	余莹, 娄亚柯, 崔荣荣, 姜玲先, 马宁. 颅内动脉支架内再狭窄的研究进展[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(06): 619-624.
[15]	王小雅，吴宇伦，坚雅婷，李涛，赵莉莉，陆家梁，路子微，党美娟，李也，张益恒，王何莹，张磊，张桂莲. 1例颅内动脉支架内亚急性血栓反复形成的思考[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(05): 516-519.